AuthorTopic: Wally Hall takes the bait (Read 4076 times)

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

It's literally the weakest excuse you could use. And if it is used by our decision makers they don't need to be running a $100 million business. I also don't think that is their mindset, just Wally's.

Basically can't let fear of failure in the next hire prevent you from moving forward.

Now the question could be asked "if we fire BB what are the chances of hiring another P5 coach with his record (at Wisconsin)?" Well that chance would be small because P5 coaches do not move very often. The BB hire was the exception not the rule and we can see with other recent hires at P5 schools the norm is either a G5 guy or a coordinator.

A better way to frame the question when asking it of a particular coach is "Who could they hire that would have a better record here than the current coach" This is a fair question if the coach is winning 9 or 10 games per year and the fan base is getting restless. Think Mark Richt at GA. That would have been a fair question. Yeah you can fire Richt because you are tired of him but the odds are that the coach hired will not be as successful. History often bears this out.

You then apply that logic to BB. Say he goes 6-6 here this year. His 5 year record would be 31-32 6.2 wins per year. Nutt averaged 7.5 and BP averaged 8.2. So 2 out of the last 3 permanent HCs were able to go 7 wins per year or better. That shows that the odds of hiring someone as good or better than BB are pretty decent.

Finding the right guy is not easy, but that is why AD's get paid the money they do. They have tremendous resources and networks to research candidates and find good fits with a high chance of success. Look inward, why did BB fail or fail to meet expectations. Was it recruiting, motivating, game planning, discipline? Whatever, you do your root cause and then find guys that check those boxes. Doesn't guarantee success just a better chance of it.

To circle back, this fear of finding someone better, complete and utter horsesh**

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

Arguing for a coach not on the merits but on "who could we get that is better" is the last bastion of defense. It's the equivalent of "yeah, I know she's ugly as sin, but have you seen me lately?"

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

Wally hasn't gotten permission from the PTBs to veer yet. He's got to keep getting his pats on the head from the taller guys. Plus see if the delay can churn up a reason for Little Rock to get their feelings hurt about something.

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

Thought the same thing--someone had their talking points faxed down from the Broyles Center this morning.

My favorite part was when he said that Bielema's results might have some coaches on the hot seat, but didn't say the real reason why that's not true for Bielema--he has a ridiculous buyout in college football's dumbest contract. Since it was a Jeff Long puff piece, saying that out loud wouldn't do.

It's literally the weakest excuse you could use. And if it is used by our decision makers they don't need to be running a $100 million business. I also don't think that is their mindset, just Wally's.

Basically can't let fear of failure in the next hire prevent you from moving forward.

Now the question could be asked "if we fire BB what are the chances of hiring another P5 coach with his record (at Wisconsin)?" Well that chance would be small because P5 coaches do not move very often. The BB hire was the exception not the rule and we can see with other recent hires at P5 schools the norm is either a G5 guy or a coordinator.

A better way to frame the question when asking it of a particular coach is "Who could they hire that would have a better record here than the current coach" This is a fair question if the coach is winning 9 or 10 games per year and the fan base is getting restless. Think Mark Richt at GA. That would have been a fair question. Yeah you can fire Richt because you are tired of him but the odds are that the coach hired will not be as successful. History often bears this out.

You then apply that logic to BB. Say he goes 6-6 here this year. His 5 year record would be 31-32 6.2 wins per year. Nutt averaged 7.5 and BP averaged 8.2. So 2 out of the last 3 permanent HCs were able to go 7 wins per year or better. That shows that the odds of hiring someone as good or better than BB are pretty decent.

Finding the right guy is not easy, but that is why AD's get paid the money they do. They have tremendous resources and networks to research candidates and find good fits with a high chance of success. Look inward, why did BB fail or fail to meet expectations. Was it recruiting, motivating, game planning, discipline? Whatever, you do your root cause and then find guys that check those boxes. Doesn't guarantee success just a better chance of it.

To circle back, this fear of finding someone better, complete and utter horsesh**

The best way to frame the question is: "Does anyone have $15,000,000 laying around?" If this answer is no, then you just grab your socks and pull.

The best way to frame the question is: "Does anyone have $15,000,000 laying around?" If this answer is no, then you just grab your socks and pull.

It's going to be on the installment plan anyway. That's how most things are done in Arkansas. People buy their furniture at Aaron's. Car's at the buy here pay here. Just pay off the coach the same way. Offer him $20,000 a week for the next 780 weeks.

I'd take Mike Leach right now. Took over a Washington State program that was 9-40 the 4 previous seasons before he got there. After going 12-25 building his first 3 seasons, he has been 19-9 in his last 3 so far. And this is at a Washington State program that has worse facilities and is in a bigger recruiting disadvantage than Arkansas.

Stick him here close to Oklahoma and Texas, and he builds an annual 8-9 game winning program, that could peak at 10-11. I don't think Bielema can do that.

It's going to be on the installment plan anyway. That's how most things are done in Arkansas. People buy their furniture at Aaron's. Car's at the buy here pay here. Just pay off the coach the same way. Offer him $20,000 a week for the next 780 weeks.

You can offer all day, but he's not required to take that offer. Most of these contracts say the entire balance is due. If you owe me everything, today, why should I take your installment plan?

We're not talking about a payday loan or renting a couch from Aaron's.

I'd take Mike Leach right now. Took over a Washington State program that was 9-40 the 4 previous seasons before he got there. After going 12-25 building his first 3 seasons, he has been 19-9 in his last 3 so far. And this is at a Washington State program that has worse facilities and is in a bigger recruiting disadvantage than Arkansas.

Stick him here close to Oklahoma and Texas, and he builds an annual 8-9 game winning program, that could peak at 10-11. I don't think Bielema can do that.

He's divisive and a jerk. There are other guys who can run a wide open offense without the negatives Leach would bring.

When columns like this start appearing, it's simply a matter of time. I agree, I don't see Bert being the kind of guy to stick out a "win big or else" year. And if the numbers for this two year period that he has to win are true, a six win or less season make it a virtual impossibility for him to win enough next year.

If it gets real bad, I predict "health problems", a negotiated buyout, and a television gig.

Regardless of your opinion of what Wally wrote he did not write it to suck up to Long. That's one of the oldest and most bogus claims on Hogville. As reporters our lives are the same whether we criticize the head coach or AD or not. I've been supportive of certain coaches and I have been very critical of others. I did not benefit or was I harmed either way with one exception. Houston Nutt got me kicked off a radio show I did. It had nothing to do with the university. It was a case of my boss caving in to some of Nutt's supporters. It was also no big deal. I was back on another show in no time.

He's divisive and a jerk. There are other guys who can run a wide open offense without the negatives Leach would bring.

You know neither one of those things. What happened to him at TT was beyond ridiculous and he won his case against them. It was one overzealous and selfimportant person that caused the whole thing. Now if you said he was a little strange or something like that I would agree, after all he's a lawyer playing at being a football coach. That's a strange thing!

I like Leach and have listened to him a lot but he may be too close to over the hill for the job.

Regardless of your opinion of what Wally wrote he did not write it to suck up to Long. That's one of the oldest and most bogus claims on Hogville. As reporters our lives are the same whether we criticize the head coach or AD or not. I've been supportive of certain coaches and I have been very critical of others. I did not benefit or was I harmed either way with one exception. Houston Nutt got me kicked off a radio show I did. It had nothing to do with the university. It was a case of my boss caving in to some of Nutt's supporters. It was also no big deal. I was back on another show in no time.

It's the same thing we heard with Nutt. "We won't get anyone better to replace him." "It will set the program back TEN YEARS!" Three years after that fake coach left we were playing in the Sugar Bowl.

But...apparently we learned nothing from that experience. We still have people claiming we can't do any better than we are doing. We have so many disadvantages that resisting the inevitable is basically futile. Honestly, if I had such a low opinion of Arkansas' potential I don't think I would tell anyone. We've reached a weird juxtaposition in which the real supporters of the program go around telling everyone how mediocre it is bound to be while the haters say, "No, we can be so much better. Don't give up on the idea of excellence."

The best way to frame the question is: "Does anyone have $15,000,000 laying around?" If this answer is no, then you just grab your socks and pull.

Then the Buffoon who drafted that contract should be fired....plain and simple! I don't see what the big deal is? If any of us put our employer or company at risk as he has done, we would get terminated in a heartbeat.

It's the same thing we heard with Nutt. "We won't get anyone better to replace him." "It will set the program back TEN YEARS!" Three years after that fake coach left we were playing in the Sugar Bowl.

But...apparently we learned nothing from that experience. We still have people claiming we can't do any better than we are doing. We have so many disadvantages that resisting the inevitable is basically futile. Honestly, if I had such a low opinion of Arkansas' potential I don't think I would tell anyone. We've reached a weird juxtaposition in which the real supporters of the program go around telling everyone how mediocre it is bound to be while the haters say, "No, we can be so much better. Don't give up on the idea of excellence."

You nailed it. Many have not learned. They revert to being weak and scared. Of course, that is how the majority of Americans are now. Like democrats and Republicans.

About 2, 3 yrs ago, PJ supposedly had an affair, slept with wife of a big booster, Auto dealer guy.Some people on Bronco Internet boards blew it wide open - the booster wife got angry, sued everyone, internet people for slander etc

PJ wife #1 left him, so even though PJ and booster wife Denied it all, his wife #1 bailed on him. Leaving many to think it was true.....

So, PJ has had colorful off the field antics. Wife #2 looks like trouble also..... When at NIU, PJ was known as a Ladies man, he is very popular with the women.As his career escalates, this stuff will likely not go away. Good times for media and fans...."

About 2, 3 yrs ago, PJ supposedly had an affair, slept with wife of a big booster, Auto dealer guy.Some people on Bronco Internet boards blew it wide open - the booster wife got angry, sued everyone, internet people for slander etc

PJ wife #1 left him, so even though PJ and booster wife Denied it all, his wife #1 bailed on him. Leaving many to think it was true.....

So, PJ has had colorful off the field antics. Wife #2 looks like trouble also..... When at NIU, PJ was known as a Ladies man, he is very popular with the women.As his career escalates, this stuff will likely not go away. Good times for media and fans...."

damn

Hey James franklin said that if you look at a guys wife you can tell how well he will recruit.

Looks like PJ Fleck can consistently bring in those top ten rated classes we've all been waiting for!

You know neither one of those things. What happened to him at TT was beyond ridiculous and he won his case against them. It was one overzealous and selfimportant person that caused the whole thing. Now if you said he was a little strange or something like that I would agree, after all he's a lawyer playing at being a football coach. That's a strange thing!

I like Leach and have listened to him a lot but he may be too close to over the hill for the job.

I've actually seen him in person and thought he was a tremendous jerk.

Finding the right guy is not easy, but that is why AD's get paid the money they do. They have tremendous resources and networks to research candidates and find good fits with a high chance of success. Look inward, why did BB fail or fail to meet expectations. Was it recruiting, motivating, game planning, discipline? Whatever, you do your root cause and then find guys that check those boxes. Doesn't guarantee success just a better chance of it.

To circle back, this fear of finding someone better, complete and utter horsesh**

It's not a question of whether or not someone can better CBB's performance. There are a long line of recent coaches in SEC West teams not named Alabama that bettered CBB's record through 50 games that could just as well be hired at Arkansas for money comparable to what CBB is getting.

The real issue for Jeff Long is that any Arkansas AD has only a limited number of involuntary removals of coaches. Before Barnhill that limit was one removal in an era when the HC and AD jobs were one in the same. Barnhill, the first true AD fired one and let another go without any effort to retain him and then he hired JFB and Barnhill's job was secure for life.

Broyles powerful as he was only had four in him and the Ford dismissal left him with no working room for a 5th dismissal when he needed it for Nutt and that forced Broyles retirement.

Long already has one scalp in his otherwise empty trophy case. CBB will be number two now or in a couple of years. Long is far less secure than JFB in his prime and probably goes out the door when he has to collect scalp number 3. That means his standard for hiring is not improving on CBB's record but buying himself job security. Finding another JFB like Barnhill did is highly unlikely so I figure he's trying not to run CBB off till he has a solid lead on his own next job.

I imagine the rest of the Country said at the time "Who could Penn State ever hire that is any good?"... coming off a horrible sex scandal & NCAA sanctions, and also having the National perception of being the most scumbag program in College Football...

But obviously that wasn't PSU's mentality. They knocked it out of the park and got James Franklin.

Hmm... I remember James Franklin's name being thrown around before we hired Bielema. Talk about what might've been

I imagine the rest of the Country said at the time "Who could Penn State ever hire that is any good?"... coming off a horrible sex scandal & NCAA sanctions, and also having the National perception of being the most scumbag program in College Football...

But obviously that wasn't PSU's mentality. They knocked it out of the park and got James Franklin.

Hmm... I remember James Franklin's name being thrown around before we hired Bielema. Talk about what might've been

Franklin would come in handy to handle any sexual assaults by FB players. Don't think we have had many at UA though.

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

Today he uses the old excuse for not being too quick to run off the current head coach:

Who could Arkansas get that is better than Bielema?

I have to laugh that Hall, a seasoned sportswriting veteran, would fall for that. That is not how the head coaching decision is analyzed. If that were the case, you'd never change anything barring catching the head coach regularly calling an "escort" service.

When it is obvious that the current head coach has hit a ceiling that is low, like Bielema has, you get the best you can get as a replacement. You do not stick with the current coach based on not being certain that the next hire is going to get better results than the current coach. There is no sure thing or certainty in any of this. When Ford could not get the job done, and he had only 4 years to show it, Arkansas hired Nutt. Nutt was fresh off a 4-7 season at Boise State. His only year there. Was there a likelihood that Nutt would do better than Ford? No one really knew but it was simply time to say, "next".

Hall also says in his editorial that Bielema's teams at Arkansas have improved as the season progresses. Really? Has he already erased the memory of the last 2 games of last year?

Last year was an enigma, and that illness is still on this team. They are playing tight and afraid. The defense is not, however. This season can turn on a dime into something awesome.